PROBLEM OF THEATRES

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 75, Issue 6443, 7 November 1947, Page 6

PROBLEM OF THEATRES

ACCOMMODATING RISING ART AND DRAMA MOVEMENTS WILL NEW ZEALAND FOLLOW THE CONTINENTAL EXAMPLE? Periodic visits from overseas artists and the projected development of a national theatre in New Zealand have brought to the notice of many people not previously interested in things of this nature the immense possibilities for the enrichment of human life that is the peculiar province of theatrical and dramatic art. Even Te Awamutu, at o.ne time considered a “poor prospect” for any form <sf artistic endeavour, has benefited by contact with cultural activity which a few years ago was the prerogative of cities and larger centres of population. Credit for much of this must go to the Community Arts Service—counterpart in New Zealand of Britain’s admirable Council for the encouragement of Music and the Arts (C.E.M.A.) the various branches of which have performed a Herculean task in bringing art and artists to country centres, and arousing the interest of potential audiences.

No national theatre movement would be a success, however, without adequate and suitable accommodation for both production and patrons. This predisposes the building and equipping throughout . the Dominion of theatres designed for the specialised needs of stage performances; obviously like the formation of a National Symphony Orchestra a responsibility only to be undertaken at the higher administrative level of an appropriate Department of Government. That such theatres are desirable if the national organisation of drama is to become a reality, is suggested by the specially designed theatres and opera houses of Italy, in which country music, drama and the arts generally, are accorded a place in public esteem normally occupied in British Dominions by food, clothing, shelter—and horseracing! Butthough there is no question of the provision in New Zealand of structures of such ornateness as that ‘ favoured in the Land of Theatres, a description of one of Italy’s oldest and finest theatres, “San Carlo”, of Naples, might not be out of place in giving a line on the leeway which New Zealand will sooner or later have to make up, before she is entitled to recognition as a complete nation. Proud of Their Theatre

The Italians evince a justifiable pride in their beloved opera, and even those of the more squalid quarters of Naples and other cities of Italy, have an amazingly comprehensive knowledge of their country’s famous operatic composers, conductors, soloists and orchestras. Neapolitans flock in their hundreds to a performance of “La Traviata” at the San Carlo Teatro, adjoining the Royal Palace, and overlooking the glorious panorama of Naples Harbour. The theatre is indeed one of the city’s proudest possessions, and it must have been the cause of some heart-aches among music-lovers of Naples when the influx of Allied troops resulted in—among other things—the virtual monopoly of San Carlo by the military. In its exterior design, with the dinginess and grime of a busy metropolis obscuring its original colouring, the San Carlo is not impressive, but a survey of the interior gives an indication of the theatre’s fitness for the function for which it was intended. The architect responsible was a Brigadier of the Royal Army, Giovanni Medrano, who was commissioned by Charles 111 of Borbon to create “the biggest theatre in Europe, in the shortest possible time.” The execution of Medrano’s design was entrusted to a certain Angelo Carasale, who .was officially described as “born of the people, famed for his talent in architecture, his works of art, and for his .hardihood.” The significance of the' last-named qualification has never been disclosed. However, Carasale’s hardihood might have been a factor in enabling him to carry out the King’s injunction, for the theatre was built in just 290 days after the commencement of construction in March, 1737. A festal day in November of that year provided the occasion for the solemn inauguration of the city’s latest amenity, and it is. officially related that King Charles 111, after the inauguration ceremony, enveigled Carasale into agreeing to construct a private passage-way between the theatre and the Royal Palace for the use of the Royal Family. With Carasale, to commence was to accomplish, and the passage-way was completed in only three hours. It is naively stated of Carasale’s part in the construction of the San Carlo theatre that the rapidity with which the task was effected made his fortune, and as a result “he was spoken to much in the Royal Palace and in the city.” Solid Magnificence

Brick and stone form the major building materials in the construction of the theatre, and an impressive facade comprises a portico with five massive Roman arches surmounted by the statues of Apollo and Minerva. Bas-reliefs—a conspicuous feature of Italian decoration—are prominent, both, in the exterior and interior design of San Carlo, and the six tiers in which the Royal Box occupies the dominating central position, are magnificently lavish in their decorative effects. The Royal box is hung rich purple drapings and vies in beauty and splendour with the .stage curtaining and the proscenium, the arch of which measures a modest 68 “spans.” An elaborate system of stairways and corridors connects the various boxes, and leads from floor to floor in a bewildering pattern of turnings and branches; but despite the immensity of elaboration which might be expected to have an effect on sound absorption and reverberation, the most critical of musicians have pronounced the acoustics of the theatre almost perfect. Famous musicians who have written operas specially for San Carlo theatre production, include Rossini and Cimarosa, while Caruso and the great Russian baritone, Fedor Scialapin, sang many times to exacting Neapolitan audiences. It is possible that even these great artists would have been “put off” somewhat had they been confronted with a notice called, “Rules ‘ for the spectators,” which, it was apparently hoped, would restrain patrons who might, wish to give vent too freely to their feelings. It pleaded:—(a) “Please do not take

in sticks, whips cjt such like;” (b) “For the tidiness of the theatre and for convenience, leave all clothing not required in the wardrobe provided;” and (c) “To ladies who occupy places in the theatre, it is not permitted for them to hold bonnets in such a way as to impede other spectators.” The extent to which these instructions are observed, having regard to the volatile Italian temperament, is a matter for conjecture.

Many Allied “visitors” of the war years expressed the Opinion ’that the San Carlo theatre was, if anything, too ornate, although they may have revised their opinions when they reached Venice and saw there un exterior embellishment of buildings of surpassing prodigality. Ornate or otherwise, ’however, a theatre of the magnificence of the San Carlo, or the colossal “La Scala,” of Milan, is an ideal institution for its particular purpose, and one that a suitable modification of which may well provide the answer to New Zealand’s need for buildings which can be legitimately called “theatres.” Especially is this the case in the four main cities, where it can normally be expected the national theatre movement will be given birth in this country.